给 (colloquial passive)
IntroducedThe cup is affected, not the doer
- You find a broken cup and report cup杯子(passive)给break打破(completed / change)了。 — The cup got broken. The sentence uses colloquial passive (passive)给.
- cup杯子 is what was broken. The sentence names no doer; it does not identify who broke it or whether it was intentional.
You find a cup broken, without naming who broke it. What does 杯子给打破了。 communicate?
The cup is the affected object in a colloquial passive. This 给 is not the recipient marker in 给他礼物. The agent can be omitted when unknown or unimportant.
Read the affected thing before (passive)给
- In this passive pattern, use affected thing + (passive)给 + (doer) + action / result. cup杯子(passive)给break打破(completed / change)了 leaves the doer out.
- cup杯子(passive)给small小plum李break打破(completed / change)了。 names Xiao Li as the doer. The cup still receives the effect of break打破.
cup杯子(passive)给break打破了。
Use this lesson’s target form 给 in the demonstrated sentence: The cup got broken: 杯子 ____ 打破了。
Receiver + 给 + Verb Phrase = a colloquial passive: 杯子给打破了.
Follow the action across three forms
- 小李break打破(completed / change)了cup杯子。 names Xiao Li as the doer first. cup杯子(passive)给small小plum李break打破(completed / change)了。 names the affected cup first.
- cup杯子(passive)给break打破(completed / change)了。 preserves the broken-cup report without naming Xiao Li. Removing a name removes information, not the breaking event.
In 杯子给打破了, 给 has a passive role similar to which word?
给 ≈ 被 here; often 被 … 给 … appear together.
杯子给小李打破了。 Who is named as doing the breaking?
小李 follows passive 给 as the named doer; 杯子 is affected.
(passive)给 can give rather than mark a passive
- I / me我(passive)给he / him他一个cup杯子。 — I give him a cup. I / me我 gives, he / him他 receives, and 一个cup杯子 is the item transferred.
- Compare this with cup杯子(passive)给break打破(completed / change)了. Giving a cup and reporting a broken cup are different actions; (passive)给 alone does not identify the sentence’s role.
Here the doer after 给 can be left out.
Yes — 杯子给打破了 (no doer named).
杯子给打破了 proves the breaking was deliberate.
The sentence names neither a doer nor their intention.
Match these complete sentences to their roles.
Read the whole construction; the same character does not give both sentences the same function.
Do not invent the unnamed doer
- gate门(passive)给close关上(completed / change)了。 — The door got closed. No doer is named in this report.
- It does not prove the speaker closed it, or that someone closed it deliberately. Add those details only when the context supplies them.
门给关上了 identifies the speaker as the person who closed the door.
The sentence reports a closed door without naming who did it.
Locate the affected object and the doer
- In this passive use, find what was affected and whether a doer is explicitly named. A missing doer remains unknown from the sentence.
- Compare complete constructions: (passive)给 can also transfer an item or introduce a recipient. Keep the action and result in the interpretation.
Read the full reference: HSK 5 grammar — Prepositions.
Recall the situation: The cup is affected, not the doer. Decide what the speaker wanted to communicate. Close the examples. Say a Mandarin response, then write it in Chinese. Explain briefly in English what the lesson’s pattern adds. Compare with the model, then change one detail and try again.
This is supported productive practice. Compare meaning and structure; your answer need not copy the model. A partner or teacher must hear the spoken response to comment on pronunciation.